HEFCE : Publications : 1998 : 98/61

Report 98/61

Environmental Report

November

Foreword

The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), working with the sector's representative bodies - the CVCP and SCOP - commissioned a pilot environmental review project at six higher education institutions.

This report on the project is aimed at those within universities and colleges who are responsible for implementing environmental policy. It is accompanied by a practical workbook to help institutions review and improve their own performance on environmental issues.

Results of the pilot show that environmental reviews can benefit institutions by:

saving money
reducing the risk of penalties for breaches of regulations
involving staff and students
dealing with practical issues - such as waste, emissions, traffic and transport
improving external perceptions of the organisation.

To realise these benefits, we recommend that institutions identify a person or group of people (possibly those responsible for estates, or health and safety) to study this report and advise on the next steps. The report includes a number of self-assessment questions to help with this process.

"I am sure that all SCOP institutions will ultimately benefit from the workbook developed through the HEFCE pilot scheme. It has far-reaching implications that underpin environmental initiatives HEIs may wish to pursue, and it is complementary to the wider commitment to environmental education envisaged in the Toyne Report and elsewhere."

Professor Norman Taylor - Chairman of SCOP, Director of the Surrey Institute of Art & Design

Background

Environmental systems are complex, and their delicate balance is being put at risk. The agenda for environmental management has changed dramatically over the last few years. Initially it was simply about raising awareness and stressing the importance of the issues. It has progressed to cover what practical steps individuals and organisations can take to improve the quality of the environment. People are now more aware of the direct benefits of such activity, which range from leaving a better legacy to saving money and avoiding legal penalties.

For higher education, the context of this debate was set out in 1993 in æThe Environmental Responsibility (Toyne) Report'. This defined the main areas of responsibility relating to the environment as:

good housekeeping (environmental policy and management systems development)
student entitlement to a basic level of environmental education
course updating to take account of environmental connections
specialist provisions in keeping with market demand.

The importance of these key areas was reinforced by the subsequent report, æEnvironmental Responsibility: A Review of the 1993 Toyne Report', and the Government's Environmental Education Strategy. The strategy's action plan emphasises the need to establish environmental management systems across the formal education sector.

Approach

The Council commissioned ESAS - the University of Sunderland's environmental consultancy and training unit - to carry out an Environmental Review Project at six institutions:

Falmouth College of Arts
Surrey Institute of Art & Design
University of Bath
University of Cambridge
University of Sunderland
University of Sussex.

Appendix A gives the terms of reference for the project, which was informed by extensive practical experience in the private and public sectors. The reviews followed the Code of Practice of the Environmental Auditors' Registration Association. They examined environmental pollution control and environmental management issues.

The aim of each review was to:

Summarise the overall regulatory position
Identify the institution's position in regard to these regulations
Provide guidance on likely future changes in environmental legislation
Benchmark current environmental performance against best practice.

Outcomes

This report outlines some of the benefits of the review for participating institutions. It suggests how other institutions can assess whether they would benefit from an environmental review and sets out what actions can be taken by senior management. The report also summarises findings of an associated social review conducted at the University of Sunderland. We are publishing an accompanying environmental audit workbook, Environmental performance in HE: Where does your institution stand?, which includes detailed guidance on how to conduct reviews.

"The environmental review has brought real benefits to the University of Sussex. Not only have we been able to evaluate the success of environmental initiatives undertaken to date but opportunities for further improvement have been identified, particularly in relation to the establishment of an environmental management system, to which the university is formally committed. Building on the raised profile of environmental issues within the university and the opportunities for improvement which were identified we are in a strong position to push the environmental agenda forwards."

Professor Gordon Conway - former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sussex

"The environmental agenda is one of the most profound challenges facing industry and higher education. The HEFCE workbook provides a basic approach to institutional environmental performance and underwrites academic research initiatives such as our Centre for Sustainable Design and Environmental Studies across curriculum content."

Ian Dumelow - Dean, Faculty of Design, The Surrey Institute of Art & Design

Benefits

An environmental review can benefit universities and colleges by:

saving costs and reducing waste
avoiding legal penalties
informing planning issues
involving staff and students
improving external perceptions of the institution.

The examples below are based on the project findings. They are typical of the issues identified in an environmental review.

"A comprehensive environmental review is an essential element in meeting our objectives, so we were delighted to participate in this project. It has made a major contribution to our understanding of the environmental impacts of our own university and the sector in general."

Dr Anne Wright CBE - Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, University of Sunderland

Saving costs

"Income from recycling, and savings from reduced waste collections, have allowed us to keep our trade refuse costs constant over the last few years, despite significant growth in both student numbers and buildings."

Helen Tompkins - House Services Manager, University of Sunderland

Structured approaches to managing energy yield immediate cost savings. Many institutions already operate energy and water management systems. At the University of Cambridge, for example, conservation measures have significantly reduced utility costs: the university uses 25% less gas and 55% less water than the HE sector average. Detailed guidance about opportunities in this area is available from the HEFCE.

Solid waste management also offers opportunities to reduce costs. Disposal costs have increased regularly, and will continue to rise due to higher landfill taxes, and waste disposal charges. Paper and drinks cans are obvious targets for recycling schemes, but an effective environmental review can identify other possibilities, such as chemicals.

The best results come where recycling is promoted on environmental grounds even though the direct benefits are lower costs "In one academic year the college has recycled over 10 metric tonnes of paper which is equivalent to 176 trees."

Henry Metcalfe - Estates and Facilities Officer, Falmouth College of Arts

Legal compliances

"The audit identified the need for us to track imminent and potential environmental legislation so that we remain in compliance at all times."

Richard Mackay - University Environmental Officer, University of Cambridge

An environmental review draws attention to legal requirements. Just as with health and safety legislation, the penalties for breach of environmental regulations include fines for the organisation, and fines and imprisonment for senior officers.

A briefing prepared for the CVCP by Professor Richard Macrory in 1992 said: "Environmental regulation is undergoing profound change in this country. New legislation and new institutional arrangements are being brought into play, while the influence of the European Community on British practice and policy grows increasingly important. Universities too would be unwise to ignore the changes taking place. They may find their own activities subject to new environmental requirements, but equally significantly the changing legal framework offers important opportunities for those universities prepared to seize them."

HE institutions particularly risk breaching the regulations on disposal of wastes, discharges to drain and emissions to atmosphere. This is because of the wide range of people who can dispose of materials in a relatively uncontrolled way. Risk areas identified in these reviews include disposal of chemicals to drain, where they could find their way into a water course, groundwater or soakaway; and uncontrolled or unauthorised emissions to the atmosphere from incinerators or extraction units in laboratories, workshops and animal houses.

It is clear from these reviews that some regulatory authorities are stricter than others in applying environmental legislation to HE institutions. This is particularly evident with consents for discharge to drain and systems for handling solid waste. Nevertheless, the institution's management need to understand and assess their legal obligations, and to put the necessary arrangements in place. Otherwise changes in approach by the regulatory bodies could leave the institution exposed.

Planning issues

The review puts an emphasis on analysing potential liabilities, such as those caused by the presence of asbestos or contaminated land, when planning new developments and institutional change. An incident at one UK university provides a vivid example. The institution recognised the dangers of asbestos, but only had partial records of its location. Major refurbishment of a large building was stopped when asbestos was found, and the consequent loss amounted to hundreds of thousands of pounds. The costs of an asbestos survey and the maintaining of adequate records would have been a fraction of this, and would have avoided the financial loss and associated disruption.

Legal controls on contaminated land have been tightened over the last few years; the costs of, and responsibility for cleaning it up are now significant. Many institutions have difficulty with correct storage of oils and chemicals in tanks and drums, which can result in contamination of ground, ground water, or drains. When buying property, institutions should take into account that the costs of cleaning up contaminated sites could outweigh the value of the asset.

The use of pesticides and herbicides in grounds' maintenance is also a sensitive issue. At the institutions involved in this project, awareness of the need for carefully managed control is coming to the fore through the activities of internal and external stakeholders.

"The development of the Grounds Environmental Policy at the University of Sussex has been a really rewarding experience. We have taken an inclusive approach - we felt that it was important that all the grounds' staff were involved, as well as other members of the university who had either a personal or professional interest. The result is a working document which contains clear and attainable targets to further enhance the campus. The enthusiastic involvement of so many people has helped make things happen quickly."

John Higgins - Grounds Superintendent, University of Sussex

Transport, traffic and car parking are major issues for many institutions. The lack of a strategic approach is a major barrier to development and can cause conflicts with local authorities and other groups. This issue cannot be addressed in isolation; external stakeholders, including local authorities and transport companies or providers, should be involved in formulating policies. The workbook documents a framework for taking this forward.

In many cases, operation of physical control systems depends on the knowledge, skill and commitment of one person, often with only basic written support materials. Examples include the operation of laboratory extraction equipment, and hazardous waste collection and disposal arrangements. The absence of this person - typically a technician in a science or engineering department - could result in a pollution incident, and possible legal infringement. Nominating back up staff, and providing them with adequate training and written procedures is a prudent safeguard.

In setting up standard operating procedures, the institution should also be able to assess what staff and resources are needed.

Involving staff & students

The institutions that took part in this project found that the environmental review, including the information gathering and interview stages, improved staff awareness of the issues. It also helped to engage people at each organisation in developing environmental responsibility throughout the organisation. Each review involved interviews with about 40 people, including senior managers, and academic, support and services staff. Each institution received a draft copy of the report which was circulated widely for comment.

The review can also involve students. Small groups of students were interviewed at the institutions, and their comments are incorporated in the findings. Their contribution to the process is invaluable in many ways, but it can be challenging.

"My work at college involved using toxic chemicals which I would never take into my home. This dilemma triggered a new area of research for me related to non-toxic processes and finishes."

Aine Hutchinson - Third year student (BA Ceramics) Falmouth College of Arts

"This review was a first step towards reducing some of the environmental impacts made by the university. Its broad range and scope was vital and its recommendations must be pursued with rigour from the top down. By instigating a progressive environmental policy, the university management will ensure that top down measures are followed through on traffic reduction, recycling, energy use, waste, and habitat conservation".

Christian Taylor - Student Environmental Society, University of Bath

"This review represents an important commitment to address environmental considerations by the University of Bath across all staff, students and administrative functions. We now need to establish a proficient environmental management system, and performance indicators, to implement the review recommendations."

Professor Alyson Warhurst - Director, International Centre for the Environment, University of Bath

In several cases the review and its report provided the catalyst for action on things that were already under consideration, but not being acted upon.

"The audit has given us the opportunity to put an environmental purchasing policy back on the agenda of the university's Purchasing Working Group."

Mike Nacey - University Purchasing Co-ordinator, University of Cambridge

External perception

The Dearing Report recommends that institutions should have mechanisms through which community interests can be taken into account in their decision making. The emerging process of social review is closely allied to environmental review and explores this issue of community interests.

Social review starts by analysing the institution's objectives and values, and identifying the stakeholders who affect, or are affected by, the institution's behaviour. The accounting process measures and reports on the extent to which the institution meets its objectives and the expectations of its stakeholders. The Government has already indicated support for this method of monitoring performance in some public spending areas, such as overseas aid.

One of the HEIs in this project, the University of Sunderland, undertook a limited social review. It concentrated on the first three stages of the process, namely:

establishing the values
defining the stakeholders
establishing performance indicators.

To define stakeholders, the institution asked staff to add names to a list circulated electronically. When the total reached 120, it called a halt.

The social review focused on links between the institution and local industry. Issues were discussed with staff internally, and with representatives of companies and business support agencies. This exercise produced the following benefits:

proof that the social accounting process developed for commercial organisations can be applied successfully to higher education institutions
staff had greater appreciation of the wide range of stakeholders in the institution
a list of performance indicators for the activities
an opportunity for external partners to tell the HEI what they expect of it.

Further details of the approach taken by the University of Sunderland, and the results, are included in the workbook.

"Our partnerships with business locally, regionally and nationally are of great importance to us for a number of reasons. Finding a proven, transparent and quantifiable method of identifying what our partners expect of us, and measuring how successful we are at meeting those expectations, is an exciting development. The process was enjoyable and challenging, and we look forward to being able to develop it further."

Martin Haywood; Director The Industry Centre, University of Sunderland.

Assessing potential

Institutions can quickly assess their potential to improve environmental performance by asking the following key questions.

These questions should be answered by a senior person, who should report on the results of this initial exercise at strategic management level to help to set the context for future initiatives. Detailed guidance on self-assessment, and how to conduct environmental reviews, is given in the audit workbook developed by this project: Environmental performance in HE: Where does your institution stand?

Key questions

Commitment & Policy

has management committed to, and taken a publicly stated position on, environmental policy?
if a policy exists, do staff know about it and understand it?
have you considered the steps necessary to integrate structured environmental management into the overall organisation of the institution?

Strategic approach including financial planning

is information on the physical resources used by the institution, including hazardous substances, energy and water, available in an accessible form to enable strategic decisions to be made on what the significant aspects are?
has someone been given the responsibility to look at the costs of energy, water and wastewater disposal?
are environmental aspects included in the normal processes of budget setting?
are environmental aspects included in investment and development plans?

Structural & resourcing issues

are structures and resources in place to implement the environmental policy?

Liabilities & costs

does the institution comply with current legislation on discharges to drains and sewers; on waste management and disposal; and on emissions to air?
are you aware that senior managers can now be prosecuted for environmental non-compliance?
have you examined waste reduction in the light of increasing waste disposal costs?
do you have systems in place to assess the liabilities associated with land and property acquisition and development?
have you assessed your position regarding noise and asbestos?

Wider contribution & communication issues

do you have a structure to analyse the implications for your institution of the wider issues of sustainable development, and how this relates to its position in the local and global community?

Moving forward

Following this initial stage, institutions may wish to form a working group headed by a senior manager, with representatives from various parts of the organisation. This would consider the approach indicated in the workbook, and formulate a plan and groups at the strategic and operational levels to take forward the review. Appropriate training will be required. Depending on the outcome, some additional analysis may be needed of specific areas or operations, and this may require external assistance. One or more people may carry out this process, following appropriate training.

Once the review is complete, the institution can formulate a considered environmental policy based on the environmental impacts of its operations. Procedures will be needed to address issues identified.

Realising the benefits

The environmental review identifies the issues that require action. To gain the full benefits, institutions will need to embed them into policy, systems and structures at strategic and operational levels. To do so means:

Accepting that there are resourcing issues

Developing and improving the environmental management systems.

Institutions have different cultures and there is no single right way to provide resources for making improvements. The contribution of enthusiasts and of those with particular expertise in specialist areas is one of the great strengths of HE. This is true on the environmental front as much as any other. These energies are valuable in improving environmental performance, but still have to be actively managed.

However improvement is resourced, each institution needs to consider the following:

Should an individual be allocated part- or full-time, or would a team approach be better? In general, a combination of the two is recommended.
An individual, even part-time, will be needed to act as a facilitator and co-ordinator; this role is central to the success of environmental improvement.
Even if there is enthusiastic commitment from senior management, the co-ordinator will need the support of groups of colleagues to carry through the necessary actions.
Can the functions of the strategic and operational groups be incorporated in existing structures, or are new groups needed? If so, who will sit on them and what reporting arrangements are necessary?
Who will be responsible for day to day compliance with environmental legislation?
Existing structures and reporting lines may need to be adapted, or new ones created.
Staff and students need to be motivated, primarily through training and communication.

However an institution conducts a review and whatever steps it takes initially, it will need an environmental management system (EMS) if it is to continually improve its overall environmental performance.

What's an EMS?

An EMS is a structured approach to identifying and evaluating an organisation's environmental impacts, and implementing arrangements to reduce them. It aims to ensure continual improvement in environmental performance, through a managed programme of setting and achieving specific objectives. An EMS applies good management practices to environmental issues, and follows the pattern of quality assurance and health and safety systems. Quality assurance processes may be improved as a result of implementing an EMS.

"I found the environmental review very helpful in providing a structure for the implementation of an effective environmental management system."

Alan Cooke - Head of Estate Services Department, The Surrey Institute of Art & Design

The process starts with policy development leading to an environmental review of the type described in this report. This provides a clear picture of where an institution stands in relation to current and forthcoming legislation and best practice. It identifies risks and opportunities. The steps which follow the review are illustrated graphically on the opposite page

Environmental policy

From the results of the review, the institution can develop an environmental policy. Publication of that policy makes clear that the institution is committed to compliance with environmental legislation, and to continual improvement in its environmental performance.

Review

The institution identifies the environmental impacts of its operations, and lists the most significant. This list provides the basis for setting objectives and targets for environmental improvement. Relevant legal and regulatory requirements are also summarised.

Implementation & operation

This stage involves setting objectives, and clearly defining and communicating what resources, structures and procedures are needed to achieve them. Appropriate training is an important aspect of this stage.

Checking & corrective action

Just as with good quality assurance systems, if is essential to check that systems are achieving what they set out to achieve, and, if not, to take action to get back on course.

Management review

The institution should regularly audit the overall position. It should assess performance against strategic objectives, and consider any modifications to the policy needed to take account of major changes in the institution - for example, new or discontinued buildings or courses - or developments in environmental knowledge.

The cycle of continual improvement then re-starts.

For institutions that are interested in developing an EMS, a guide to the principles as they affect higher education is to be published by Forum for the Future.

Conclusion

All the institutions involved in this project believe that by improving their environmental management they can make an increased contribution to the community - locally, nationally and internationally over the coming years. If other institutions want to obtain the benefits that these improvements offer, then an environmental review is an important step forward, but only if it is:

backed up by the commitment of the whole institution
part of an integrated approach
supported by sufficient resources.

"Involvement in the HEFCE initiative has enabled the college to progress its environmental policy and to develop an action plan aimed at achieving a recognised European benchmark standard over the next two years. We are hopeful that the step by step guide and workbook will provide a simple, cost effective model for other like-minded institutions."

Professor Alan Livingston - Principal, Falmouth College of Arts

Appendix

HEFCE Environmental Audit Project - Terms of reference

Objective

For the pilot sites, to:

Carry out a systematic examination of the interaction between institutional operations and the surrounding environment. This includes compliance with legislation and covers all emissions to air, land and water; the effects of the institutional and neighbouring community, landscape and ecology; and the public's perception of the operation of the institution in the local area;
carry out a systematic evaluation to determine whether any existing environmental management system is comprehensive in its scope, effective in its operation and is suitable to fulfil the institutions' environmental policy and objectives;
produce an individualised and detailed report for each of the participating institutions, together with a summary and anonymised comparative report on the findings at each institution.

For the sector, to:

develop a ætool kit' for higher education institutions to assist them to carry out their own environmental audits and recommendations on the support necessary for those conducting such audits;
produce a report that sets out the business case for conducting environmental audits;
produce briefing notes that cover emerging issues that are relevant to this area, for institutions to consider in the future.

Scope

It is anticipated that the following issues will have to be addressed:

coherent overall aims, objectives, policies, plans, targets and operational programmes in respect of environmental management
environmental risk assessment
allocation of environmental responsibilities and powers
standard setting, monitoring and enforcement
incorporation of environmental factors into investment appraisals, cost benefit analyses and other economic evaluations
environmental facts and figures integrated into main financial and management information and reporting systems
EMAS and its potential application to the HE sector
relevant procurement issues
relevant social and ethical issues
pollution safeguards and prevention measures
disclosure and public accountability arrangements
environmental training programmes for staff
research and developments of environmental issues, internal and external
participation in wide ranging activities including sponsorship and other forms of support to outside relevant interest groups.

The study should also produce recommendations on the methods and timings of disseminating the results of the project to the HE sector.

"The University of Bath is committed to improving its environmental management systems and is pleased to have participated in the HEFCE initiative towards the development of meaningful environmental performance indicators and best practice guides."

Professor David VandeLinde - Vice-Chancellor, University of Bath

"The Council funded this study to establish the costs and benefits that environmental reviews offer and to provide advice to other institutions contemplating such an exercise. We are committed to working in partnership with institutions to develop, evaluate and disseminate good management practice. I hope that institutions will apply good environmental management practice so that they can realise the benefits outlined in this report."

Brian Fender - Chief Executive, Higher Education Funding Council for England

Professor Gordon Conway - former Vice-Chancellor, University of Sussex

Printed copies of this report are available from:

Publications
HEFCE
Northavon House
Coldharbour Lane
Bristol BS16 1QD

Telephone
0117 931 7438 or
0117 931 7464 (24 hours)

Fax
0117 931 7463

E-mail/Web
hefce@hefce.ac.uk
http://www.hefce.ac.uk